Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Idarubicin versus epirubicin in drug-eluting beads-transarterial chemoembolization for treating hepatocellular carcinoma: A real-world retrospective study

  • Research
  • Published:
Investigational New Drugs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of idarubicin-loaded drug-eluting beads-transarterial chemoembolization (IDA-TACE) and epirubicin-loaded drug-eluting beads-TACE (EPI-TACE) in treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). All patients with HCC treated with TACE in our hospital between June 2020 and January 2022 were screened. The included patients were divided into the IDA-TACE group and EPI-TACE group to compare overall survival (OS), time to progression (TTP), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events. There were 55 patients each in the IDA-TACE and EPI-TACE groups. Compared with the EPI-TACE group, the median TTP in the IDA-TACE group was not significantly different (10.50 vs. 9.23 months; HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.40–1.16; P = 0.154), whereas the survival status in the IDA-TACE group tended to be better (neither achieved; HR 0.47; 95% CI 0.22–1.02; P = 0.055). Based on the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging system for subgroup analysis, considering stage C patients, the IDA-TACE group performed significantly better in terms of ORR (77.1% vs. 54.3%, P = 0.044), median TTP (10.93 vs. 5.20 months; HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.24–0.89; P = 0.021), and median OS (not achieved vs. 17.80 months; HR 0.41; 95% CI 0.18–0.93; P = 0.033). Considering stage B patients, there were no significant differences between the IDA-TACE and EPI-TACE groups in terms of ORR (80.0% vs. 80.0%, P = 1.000), median TTP (10.20 vs. 11.2 months; HR 1.41; 95% CI 0.54–3.65; P = 0.483), or median OS (neither achieved, HR 0.47; 95% CI 0.04–5.24; P = 0.543). Notably, leukopenia was more common in the IDA-TACE group (20.0%, P = 0.052), and fever was more common in the EPI-TACE group (49.1%, P = 0.010). IDA-TACE was more effective than EPI-TACE in treating advanced-stage HCC and comparable in treating intermediate-stage HCC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

AFP:

Alpha-fetoprotein

ECOG:

Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group

OS:

Overall survival

IDA-TACE:

Idarubicin-DEB-TACE group

EPI-TACE:

Epirubicin-DEB-TACE group

References

  1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL et al (2021) Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA A Cancer J Clin 71:209–249. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Chen J-G, Zhu J, Zhang Y-H et al (2021) Liver Cancer Survival: A Real World Observation of 45 Years with 32,556 Cases. JHC 8:1023–1034. https://doi.org/10.2147/JHC.S321346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bruix J, Reig M, Sherman M (2016) Evidence-Based Diagnosis, Staging, and Treatment of Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Gastroenterology 150:835–853. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2015.12.041

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mokdad AA, Hester CA, Singal AG, Yopp AC (2017) Management of hepatocellular in the United States. Chin Clin Oncol 6:21–21. https://doi.org/10.21037/cco.2017.04.04

  5. Raoul J-L, Forner A, Bolondi L et al (2019) Updated use of TACE for hepatocellular carcinoma treatment: How and when to use it based on clinical evidence. Cancer Treat Rev 72:28–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctrv.2018.11.002

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Reig M, Forner A, Rimola J et al (2022) BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendation: The 2022 update. J Hepatol 76:681–693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2021.11.018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Galle PR, Forner A, Llovet JM et al (2018) EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 69:182–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2018.03.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Park J, Chen M, Colombo M et al (2015) Global patterns of hepatocellular carcinoma management from diagnosis to death: the BRIDGE Study. Liver Int 35:2155–2166. https://doi.org/10.1111/liv.12818

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Llovet JM, Hilgard P, de Oliveira AC et al (2008) Sorafenib in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma. N Engl J Med 13

  10. Chung GE, Lee J-H, Kim HY et al (2011) Transarterial Chemoembolization Can Be Safely Performed in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Invading the Main Portal Vein and May Improve the Overall Survival. Radiology 258:627–634. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.10101058

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gorodetski B, Chapiro J, Schernthaner R et al (2017) Advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein thrombosis: conventional versus drug-eluting beads transcatheter arterial chemoembolization. Eur Radiol 27:526–535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4445-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Pinter M, Hucke F, Graziadei I et al (2012) Advanced-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Transarterial Chemoembolization versus Sorafenib. Radiology 263:590–599. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12111550

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Boulin M, Guiu S, Chauffert B et al (2011) Screening of anticancer drugs for chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma. Anticancer Drugs 22:741–748. https://doi.org/10.1097/CAD.0b013e328346a0c5

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Boulin M, Schmitt A, Delhom E et al (2016) Improved stability of lipiodol–drug emulsion for transarterial chemoembolisation of hepatocellular carcinoma results in improved pharmacokinetic profile: Proof of concept using idarubicin. Eur Radiol 26:601–609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3855-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Roth GS, Teyssier Y, Abousalihac M et al (2020) Idarubicin vs doxorubicin in transarterial chemoembolization of intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma. WJG 26:324–334. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v26.i3.324

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Boulin M, Hillon P, Cercueil JP et al (2014) Idarubicin-loaded beads for chemoembolisation of hepatocellular carcinoma: results of the IDASPHERE phase I trial. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 39:1301–1313. https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.12746

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Guiu B, Chevallier P, Assenat E et al (2019) Idarubicin-loaded Beads for Chemoembolization of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: The IDASPHERE II Single-Arm Phase II Trial. Radiology 291:801–808. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019182399

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Fan W, Zhu B, Yue S et al (2022) Idarubicin‐Loaded DEB‐TACE plus Lenvatinib versus Lenvatinib for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A propensity score‐matching analysis. Cancer Med cam4.4937. https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.4937

  19. Lencioni R, Llovet J (2010) Modified RECIST (mRECIST) Assessment for Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Semin Liver Dis 30:052–060. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0030-1247132

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Johnson PJ, Berhane S, Kagebayashi C et al (2015) Assessment of Liver Function in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A New Evidence-Based Approach—The ALBI Grade. JCO 33:550–558. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.57.9151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Berman E, Heller G, Santorsa J et al (1991) Results of a randomized trial comparing idarubicin and cytosine arabinoside with daunorubicin and cytosine arabinoside in adult patients with newly diagnosed acute myelogenous leukemia. Blood 77:1666–1674. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood.V77.8.1666.1666

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Guiu B, Jouve J-L, Schmitt A et al (2018) Intra-arterial idarubicin_lipiodol without embolisation in hepatocellular carcinoma: The LIDA-B phase I trial. J Hepatol 68:1163–1171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2018.01.022

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Guiu C, Piron, et al (2019) Transarterial Chemoembolization of Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Idarubicin-Loaded Tandem Drug-Eluting Embolics. Cancers 11:987. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers11070987

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Parikh ND, Waljee AK, Singal AG (2015) Downstaging hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review and pooled analysis: Down-Staging Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Liver Transpl 21:1142–1152. https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.24169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sun H-C, Zhu X-D (2021) Downstaging Conversion Therapy in Patients With Initially Unresectable Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An Overview. Front Oncol 11:772195. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.772195

  26. Peng Z, Fan W, Zhu B et al Lenvatinib Combined With Transarterial Chemoembolization as First-Line Treatment for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Phase III, Randomized Clinical Trial (LAUNCH). J Clin Oncol 12

  27. Friberg LE, Henningsson A, Maas H et al (2002) Model of Chemotherapy-Induced Myelosuppression With Parameter Consistency Across Drugs. JCO 20:4713–4721. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2002.02.140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Piska K, Koczurkiewicz P, Bucki A et al (2017) Metabolic carbonyl reduction of anthracyclines — role in cardiotoxicity and cancer resistance. Reducing enzymes as putative targets for novel cardioprotective and chemosensitizing agents. Invest New Drugs 35:375–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10637-017-0443-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The patients participating in this study are sincerely acknowledged.

Funding

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Chenghao Zhao, Huzheng Yan and Zhanwang Xiang contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Interventional Radiology, The 3rd Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, 600 Tianhe Lu Road, Guangzhou, 510630, China

    Chenghao Zhao, Huzheng Yan, Zhanwang Xiang, Haofan Wang, Mingan Li & Mingsheng Huang

Authors
  1. Chenghao Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Huzheng Yan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zhanwang Xiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Haofan Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mingan Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mingsheng Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: Mingsheng Huang, Mingan Li, Chenghao Zhao. Data curation: Zhanwang Xiang, Haofan Wang. Formal analysis: Huzheng Yan, Haofan Wang. Investigation: Chenghao Zhao, Huzheng Yan, Zhanwang Xiang. Methodology: Chenghao Zhao; Mingsheng Huang, Mingan Li. Project administration: Mingsheng Huang, Mingan Li. Resources: Mingsheng Huang, Mingan Li. Software: Chenghao Zhao, Huzheng Yan, Zhanwang Xiang. Supervision: Mingsheng Huang, Mingan Li, Chenghao Zhao. Writing – original draft: Chenghao Zhao, Huzheng Yan, Haofan Wang. Writing – review & editing: Mingsheng Huang, Mingan Li.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mingsheng Huang.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University and complied with the Declaration of Helsinki 1975.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from legal guardians.

Consent to publish

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Competing interests

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhao, C., Yan, H., Xiang, Z. et al. Idarubicin versus epirubicin in drug-eluting beads-transarterial chemoembolization for treating hepatocellular carcinoma: A real-world retrospective study. Invest New Drugs 41, 617–626 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10637-023-01377-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10637-023-01377-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation